Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
What do Dwarf players make of RANGERS?
Are they good or are they simply a fluff piece? Why would I use them? Are they viable in a 1000pt game? When would they be viable?
The problem with rangers in most players’ eyes is that they are a ranked slow unit with the scouts rule. As such the normal way of using scouts (advance hidden deployment) is pretty much useless as we can't hide the unit all that well as we move so slowly through cover we can be stuck travelling through it for 2-3 turns letting the enemy just bypass us.
a new school of thinking has appeared suggesting that we use the scouts rule to deploy the rangers in our own deployment zone as a counter deploy to any holes we see the enemy line. equipping them with throwing axes also opens the chances of making a unit of warriors a little bit more versatile and letting them make a stand and shoot reaction against a charging enemy possibly making it slightly easier to win the combat.
rangers have their uses but they are very, very specialist and in my opinion should be deployed as better equipped warriors more than anything else (S4 stand and shoot then an option between S5 great weapons or the hand weapon + shield combo) in 1000 points I’d say that these guys are a little too expensive for what they can provide. at 2000 or more probably 3000 points rangers will probably perform significantly better for what you are investing in them.
spambot kill tally: 79
[16:19] <@Alzer> Arky's right though
[16:20] <@Kaiser-> I know he is.
[16:20] <@Kaiser-> He usually is.
[16:20] <@Kaiser-> Sometimes it's intentional.
[00:01] <+zubus> i love you, ya skirt wearin nothern monkey! ^_^
as always, Ark, you da man!
Two other uses of scouts that occur to me. Both involve a simple principle: scouts must be behind cover, but they don't have to be in it, or facing towards it. So you start behind cover and march around it.
1) small unit to stop flankers/war-machine hunters or serve as a speed bump.
2) large unit to tie up main enemy in conjunction with a dwarf speed army (strollaz rune or anvil).
Food for thought.
Arena of Death Champion: Nexim of the Guldskullz Tribe. Fear my wrath!
I actually think the concept of Dwarf rangers is rather cool and originally I really wanted to inclued a unit in my army, but the more I thought about them the more problems I saw with using them. Most of the problems boil down to points cost. I would like rangers a whole lot better if you didnt have to buy great weapons for them. This little upgrade puts the cost of even the cheap dwarf warrior in the points range of special toops for not a lot of utility. This points cost also makes them hard to justify as they probably wont see enough combat or do enough damage to make back their points cost.
I personally wound use dwarf rangers if they didnt have the great weapons requierment and they were a 0-2 choice instead of 0-1. I could fully justify a couple large units of dwarf warriors with shields and hand weapons armed with crossbows that could forward deploy. Their survivability would be increased vs. their points cost.
The only honorable options left to we combatants is seppuku or semantics...which amount to the same thing really.